Bulwark Takes - Did Whitmer Kill Her 2028 Chances With This?

Episode Date: May 6, 2025

Sam Stein, Lauren Egan, and Jonathan Cohn explore how top Democrats are dealing with Trump. Some go hard, some play nice, and others are stuck in the middle. It’s not going great.

Hey guys, it's me, Sam Stein, Managing Editor at The Borg. I'm joined by two colleagues, Lauren Egan, Jonathan Cohn. I didn't list them in any order based on my appreciation for them. Yes, you did. Reverse appreciation for them. We're going to be talking about Democrats specifically. What we think are three distinct ways that the parties decided to take on Donald Trump. We're going to get into all of that in a bit, but before we do, public service announcement, you would be wise, very wise to subscribe to our YouTube feed. A lot of good stuff here. Get it. Make sure you have it. Subscribe to the feed. Thank you very much. All right, Jonathan, I'm going to start with you

because you wrote the piece over the weekend. Your basic, the premise of your piece was that there's two models that Michigan Democrats specifically are employing. We're going to get to another Midwestern politician in a second, but there's two models that Democrats are employing when it comes to, or deplaning, I should say, when it comes to Donald Trump. There's the Gresham-Whitmer model, and then there's Alyssa Slotkin model and very briefly as briefly as cone can get um you've been looking at the reader comment i've edited well i've edited you for several years prior to you coming to the bulwark so i know uh but how do you describe those models the whitmer model uh as it has emerged because you know everyone remembers gretchen whitmer from the

fight like hell by pat he packed i was fighting with has emerged, because, you know, everyone remembers Gretchen Whitmer from the fight like hell by PAC. Yeah. Fighting with, you know, Trump and COVID. You know, after Trump got elected, her model was, look, he's the president. We, the state of Michigan, depend on working with the federal government. So I'm going to work with the federal government. And her model has been, you know, she's been to Washington a number of times. She's lobbied him directly on matters that she thinks are important. Those include, there was a big airbase here and its

future was in doubt. She lobbied hard to have an extra squadron brought there to replace a retiring squadron. It's a big economic matter for that part of Michigan that was awarded. In the process of lobbying, she ended up in the Oval Office in a now famous, you know, picture where she was like, don't, you know, don't take my picture. And, you know, they were, Trump was in that Air Force Base last week, and she was there. And so a lot of pictures of her standing next to Trump, she has, you know, that's, it's a less adversarial, I would say, you know, trying to sort of, you know. That's one model. Then there's the Slotkin model. Yeah.

So Slotkin, who also kind of a bipartisan, very much presents herself as a bipartisan senator who appeals to Republicans as well as Democrats, really recently has kind of turned up the volume on her attacks on Trump. I saw her give a speech a couple weeks ago here in Michigan. And it was notable to me how adversarial it was. And, you know, especially on the topic of tariffs, where, you know, her line was, you know, sometimes tariffs work. And if they're part of a, you know, economic strategy, sure, which actually is something Whitmer has said. But it was couched as a like, you got to do it right. And

the way Trump is doing it, he's so unpredictable and it's all over the place and it's ruining our relationships, our allies. And just it was a very, it was a very direct, harsh attack. And she very much was making that point in her speech, like we Democrats need to come on stronger, need to be more aggressive at sort of prosecuting the case against Trump. So that's really the difference. You know, that's sort of vocal. I'm going to go after Trump. I'm going to attack him or I'm going to be I'm going to work with him where I have to because my state depends on it.

Right. All right. Now there's a third model, Lauren. I'm not sure how we've dubbed this, but we're going to call it the J.B. Pritzker model, which is what? Yeah, I think it's pretty similar to the slot can model. No, no. It's just, just, it's just go through, go for the throat.

Yeah. Just to be really aggressive. Right. To be, just be out there like shitting on Trump. Right. But that's, that's like, that's kind of her personality too. But yeah, it's, it's to go at Trump for everything all the time, constantly. Um, and I think there's a few governors that fall into that

camp it's like pritzker uh tim walls has been doing that um who else can you think of like josh shapiro has been doing that too and i mean like yeah yeah yeah he's been pretty aggressive i'll give him that but i mean they're also all probably have like an eye towards their own. Yeah, but so does Whitmer. Well, no, Whitmer's term limited. So, so here's my, here's my thinking about this. These are all three politicians who have national profiles. I'm talking about Whitmer, Slotkin, she did deliver the state of the union response. And Pritzker, obviously. They all have national profiles. They're all kind of adopting different models here to a degree. Whitmer, and I think, Cone, you mentioned this piece, or at least we talked about it,

which is Whitmer's from a state where it's a divided government, whereas Pritzker's not. Whitmer may have a different view of her political future than Pritzker, who clearly has an eye on the White House. But are there any other reasons that you guys suspect to explain why they're adopting different approaches beyond those two? You know, I will say this is, you know, having covered Whitmer specifically over the years, she is kind of in her bones, like this bipartisan, we should all get along and find ways to work, even if we're enemies. That's actually a pretty big part of her identity, for better or worse, depending on your, you

know, perspective. You know, her dad was a Republican. Her mom was a Democrat. She always talks about that. So I do think some of it is personal style. I think some of it is her political calculation, being in a divided state that voted for Trump. You know, I think she's very aware of the fact that she's got a lot of constituents who like Trump. You know, I think she's very aware of the fact that she's got a lot of constituents who like Trump and on issues like trade, immigration. You know, I think she's very

conscious of that. So I think that's her personality, both in terms of what she believes in and how she reads the political landscape. And Lauren, the other thing is, how much flexibility do they have with their own voters on this? And that's something that I think is kind of like an existential question for Democrats. Like even today, we're, we're taping this on Monday. Muriel Browser, mayor of DC is with Trump in the Oval Office. She's there because they're announcing the NFL draft is going to be in DC in 2027. I'm struck by the fact that Trump has been fairly nasty towards her over the

years. They just signed a bill. The House did. They passed it, in fact, stripping a billion dollars from the city budget. You know, they've had a really adversarial relationship. But this year she's decided, well, I got to, you know, there's tangible benefits to be had if I actually can talk to the president and build a relationship with him. He, the White House reportedly wants to get that billion dollars back to the DC budget. Now he's got this NFL draft thing. So, you know, she's going to be fine, but I am kind of curious,

like do Democratic voters recognize the distinctions and the nuances that Jonathan's writing about? I think for the most part, no, like we keep hearing from a lot of these, not, not right. I think we keep hearing from a lot of these – not right. I think we keep hearing from a lot of these voters that they want their elected leaders to fight for them, whatever that may look like. And that really is I think like a style thing. Could that just be like the base of the base, right? Like the loudest people who are like – Sure. It's like the people that are online that are complaining about it.

Yeah. But like, I don't know, you have to be like really like read into sort of like the latest was a frustration that, that, you know, they get where she was coming from. They get it. You want to get tangible results, but I think there was also the sense that like, okay, but what's good for Michigan is also like, you need to look big picture, like legitimizing Trump, legitimizing Trumpism in the Republican party long-term isn't good for Michigan either. And so there was, I think there was some frustration in terms of like how you define like what's good for your constituents in this moment. That I think is pretty interesting, like debate that's playing out in the party. I mean, Conrad, how does that play out in Michigan? Because Whitmer's not running again, but there is an open Senate Democratic primary. And so, you know, I feel like there might be

a way in which her approach to Trump might be a kind of dividing issue in that primary itself. I you would assume so. Right. I mean, it's something I didn't make it into my story because there wasn't space. What? You know, one of the people, one of the, you know, Dana Nessel, who's our attorney general here, also very high profile, quite openly critical. I mean, she mentioned Governor Whitmer by name, but has been sort of subtweeting Whitmer for the last few months saying, you know, I don't want to legitimize Trump in any way. I can't. And, you know, the Senate field now for the open Senate seat, it's going to have Mallory Gamora, who's pretty progressive. Abdul El-Sayed, who's really progressive, and who had challenged Whitmer in 2018 for the Democratic nomination that she eventually won and gave her a good run for the money. And then Haley Stevens, who's more of a kind of establishment type. But I, you know, so, you know, this is the dynamic here is, you know, you were saying, is it just the online

people? Is it just the base? And I suspect to some extent, sure, I do think that's true. I think the anger at Whitmer for like, you know, cozying up to Trump is, you know, disproportionately coming from people who are very invested right now. Flip side is when you're in a Democratic primary, they do have probably a little outside influence that eventually you do have to get to the general election. I'm sure if I, you know, you had Gretchen Whitmer here, she would say, yeah, but the people you actually need to win the general election, they're the ones who are going to appreciate the fact that even though they know I hate Trump, I got jobs. Yeah. You know? And so, you know, it's a dilemma. Okay. But hold on. There's the, so that, yes, but there is, I'm just going to throw this out as the devil's advocate and Lauren, you can take it

and Cone, you can take it. But like the flip side is maybe you can stand up to Trump and get stuff done. And I guess the model here is Janet Mills. So the backstory here is Janet Mills, governor of Maine, kind of famously stood up to Trump during a meeting early in his administration over trans athletes in her state. I think there's like a handful maybe in, they want all trans athletes banned. Mills says it's a state issue. We'll deal with it however we want. And then Trump, of course, in a classic bit of fit, decided he was just going to like pull supplemental, you know, SNAP benefits, child nutrition from the state of Maine and then Maine sued. And then over the weekend, the suit was resolved and basically Maine won.

Mills is quoted as telling a paper, quote, it's good to feel a victory like this. We took him to court and we won. And that's it. I mean, she stood up, she won. She didn't feel the need to stand with him at the Oval Office or at some event to make sure that everything went well. She fought the fight. Now, Jenna Mills doesn't have a political future and Gretchen Whitmer might. But is that not another model to showcase? Yes, but I think it's also, it's risky business. It is risky, yeah.

That might not, they might not have, we don't know how that court case could have gone. Well, the fact that they settled suggests we know where it was going. Sure, sure. I'm saying like, like insert another issue, like whatever the next thing might be from Trump, right? Like this, now that he knows they are going to have to settle for something like this, like what would he try to do next time? So I think you get why someone like Whitmer or other governors are fearful of that and want to be sensitive to that. Like, it's great that this worked out for Maine, but that's not necessarily going to be the case

every single time for every single governor on every single issue. I mean, the flip side is Gavin Newsom has not gotten disaster relief for California for the wildfires, despite, you know, doing his best to... Despite Gavin Newsom being kind of all over the map on things. Yes. He's hard to put in a box. Yeah, I don't really. He jumps between the boxes. He can't decide. Cohen, any last thoughts on this?

Yeah, I just say, I mean, I think it's a genuinely tough call. And that's why I write about policy, not politics, because I'm not the strategist here. I can see it both ways. Yeah. I know. Great TV, right? No, I mean, it's a very profound. It's true, though. Very profound. I think it's true. I mean, it TV, right? No, I mean, it's a very profound. It's true, though. Very profound.

I think it's true. I mean, it honestly is true. And I think people who try to deal in absolutes on this issue, I mean, look, Gretchen Whitmer got a lot of stuff done. Now, there was a lot of humiliation that came with it. That was the price tag. And she's going to be, you know, she may have risked a fair bit of her political future. But she did get stuff done. I think the slot game model probably is the best one, to be, you know, she may have risked a fair bit of her political future, but she did get stuff done. I think the slot game model probably is the best one, to be honest.

I feel like strategic engagement on the Trump wars where you feel good about it is probably the smartest thing to do. But who knows? She's not in the governor's seat, so she doesn't have the same responsibilities. Yeah. I was just going to say, and there is more. I mean, we've got to wait. I know if you're thinking like presidential 2028 contenders, we've got a ways to. There's gonna be more issues. So, you know, let's see. Let's see how this plays out. You know, maybe. Yeah, that's true. Medicaid cuts, you know, that she ends up coming out fighting. If you're Whitmer or any of these people and, you know, you have a mix of times when you can say I did fight here. I didn't fight there. Maybe that makes a difference. I think we're sort of colored, yes. And I think we're just sort of colored by what happens in these kind of iconic moments, right? Like you, you remember like Charlie Crist hugging Obama when he deplaned and, you know, Chris Christie

after Hurricane Sandy, like those things did matter materially in a very sort of superficial sense, but in a real political sense too. And so Whitmer with the folder in front of her, I think is going to be one of those iconic moments. But then again, you know, Trump gives you plenty of fodder, so we shall see. All right, Lauren, Jonathan, thank you so much. Really appreciate it. Thank you guys for watching on the tube. As always, subscribe to the feed and we will catch you later.